Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/815

 808 FEDERAL REPORTER. �4. Samb — Same— Lachbs. — Ileld, further, that the fact that the libellant ald not proceed against the vessel until the recovery of the judgment, in the Personal action against the master and owners, did not consli- tute laches. �6. Samb — Samk — Attachmbnt. — EM, further, that it was not necessary that the vessel should have been attached, before the flling of the libel, to enforce the statutory lien. �6. Samb — Samb — Olbuical Erkok — Jurisdiction. — Tldd, further, that a mere clerical error in docketing the case would not oust the jurisdic- tion of the court. �In Admiralty. Sur motion to dismiss libel, etc. �Battons e Sons, for steamer Boston and owners. �H. H. McCormick and Wier e Gibson, for Hatch, libellant. �A.CHES0N, D. J. Section 4465, U. S. Eev. St., enacts as fol- 1» ./8 : "It shall not be lawful to take on board of any steamer a ^reater number of passengers than is stated in the certifi- cat» of inspection, and for every violation of this provision the master or owner shall be liable, to any person suing for the aame, to forfeit the amount of passage money and $10 for each passenger beyond the number allowed." By section 4469 it is enacted that "the penalties imposed by sections 4465 and 4468 shall be a lien upon the vessel in each case; but a bond may, as provided in other cases, be given to secure the satisfaction of the judgment." �On the seventh of August, 1878, the libellant in this case brought an action of debt, in the United States district court for the western district of Pennsylvania, against Joseph Waltowei, master, and Walter B. ïïarrison and Edward H. Morton, owners, of the steam-boat Boston, torecover penalties, amounting to $1,717, alleged to have been incurred by them on the fourteenth of July, 1878, by reason of a violation of section 4465, upon the occasion of a voyage which the boat made from McKeesport, on the Monongahela river, to Bay- yard's oil well, on the Youghiogheny river, in said district. That action was tried before a jury on May 3, 1880, and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount of the penalties claimed, and judgment on the verdict was entered May 8, 1880. ����